Normally I would want to say that these polls are a good thing, in that they provide hope to those in the opposition. But I am sure that we both agree that in Israel these spot polls can create a dynamic that can usher in regime change. In that sense, they are mini elections. Privately run by polling companies and the mainstream anti-Bibi media, above reproach because, well, Science.
It doesn't seem to me that the "far-right" (traditionally Jewish) elements will bolt this time. Still the opposition can base its hope on the perennial defectors: those of the Likud. And for good reason. From the great Arik Sharon, all the way through to Liberman and Saar, there is always a Likudnik ready to betray the very principles the professing of which brought him or her to power. I'm not saying that bitterly. It is what it is. Ideology is not what it used to be.
There could easily be room for compromise on the Supreme Court issue. I remind you that many of the main opposition leaders, including Lapid, are on record supporting reform as recently as a year ago. Let's call what they want a "reigning-in" of the SC. Between "capsizing" the Court and reigning it in, a compromise can be found.
The problem is that there is blood in the water: that poll you mention can lead the opposition to believe that this government can be overthrown. If that is the case, then there is no need for them to compromise. Lapid has said as much. The Likud, realizing that the whole issue was handled in a disastrous manner will leave it on the shelf for now. But the opposition is all in on regime change, and in doing so are guaranteeing that the next time the reform is advanced, it will be in its original form.
I was disappointed by your bringing into the discussion the algorithm of Jewish murders. 36 murders in a year and a half, against 10 in three months. Each of them an entire world, extinguished. Which side wins? I know you feel the pain as I do. I think you could have left this out without weakening the points you are trying to get across.
Your scenarios seem to sum up the possibilities of the way forward. I will add one to the list.
No compromise on SC reform. Left on the shelf for now. No betrayals in the Likud. The six-front war which seems inevitable now will occur. The Jews prevail, stronger than ever. Then back to politics as usual.
I wrote: "Chagrin among Likud and other right-wing voters is heightened by the fact that since the new government took office—despite boastful promises especially by its far-right elements—19 people have been killed in terror attacks in three and a half months. Under the previous Bennett-Lapid unity government—which the right-wing opposition attacked fiercely for supposed softness on security—36 were killed in a year and a half." Note--19, not 10 as you wrote in your comment.
typo. Now is the significance in the comparison of the numbers? Or in the actual numbers? Are a thousand Jews are murdered by terrorists over the span of ten years better than a thousand Jews murdered over the span of one year? Is a situation wherein 150 Jews are murdered in one month by terrorist better than 100 Jews murdered in one month? That's what I call the Algorithm of Jewish Blood. Where is the utilitarian line drawn? What is an acceptable rate of murder by terrorists? When the terrorists cross the line too much, we know how to act. It happened once--the Park Hotel massacre. The entire people of Israel rose up and demanded decisive action. And received it.
Normally I would want to say that these polls are a good thing, in that they provide hope to those in the opposition. But I am sure that we both agree that in Israel these spot polls can create a dynamic that can usher in regime change. In that sense, they are mini elections. Privately run by polling companies and the mainstream anti-Bibi media, above reproach because, well, Science.
It doesn't seem to me that the "far-right" (traditionally Jewish) elements will bolt this time. Still the opposition can base its hope on the perennial defectors: those of the Likud. And for good reason. From the great Arik Sharon, all the way through to Liberman and Saar, there is always a Likudnik ready to betray the very principles the professing of which brought him or her to power. I'm not saying that bitterly. It is what it is. Ideology is not what it used to be.
There could easily be room for compromise on the Supreme Court issue. I remind you that many of the main opposition leaders, including Lapid, are on record supporting reform as recently as a year ago. Let's call what they want a "reigning-in" of the SC. Between "capsizing" the Court and reigning it in, a compromise can be found.
The problem is that there is blood in the water: that poll you mention can lead the opposition to believe that this government can be overthrown. If that is the case, then there is no need for them to compromise. Lapid has said as much. The Likud, realizing that the whole issue was handled in a disastrous manner will leave it on the shelf for now. But the opposition is all in on regime change, and in doing so are guaranteeing that the next time the reform is advanced, it will be in its original form.
I was disappointed by your bringing into the discussion the algorithm of Jewish murders. 36 murders in a year and a half, against 10 in three months. Each of them an entire world, extinguished. Which side wins? I know you feel the pain as I do. I think you could have left this out without weakening the points you are trying to get across.
Your scenarios seem to sum up the possibilities of the way forward. I will add one to the list.
No compromise on SC reform. Left on the shelf for now. No betrayals in the Likud. The six-front war which seems inevitable now will occur. The Jews prevail, stronger than ever. Then back to politics as usual.
I wrote: "Chagrin among Likud and other right-wing voters is heightened by the fact that since the new government took office—despite boastful promises especially by its far-right elements—19 people have been killed in terror attacks in three and a half months. Under the previous Bennett-Lapid unity government—which the right-wing opposition attacked fiercely for supposed softness on security—36 were killed in a year and a half." Note--19, not 10 as you wrote in your comment.
typo. Now is the significance in the comparison of the numbers? Or in the actual numbers? Are a thousand Jews are murdered by terrorists over the span of ten years better than a thousand Jews murdered over the span of one year? Is a situation wherein 150 Jews are murdered in one month by terrorist better than 100 Jews murdered in one month? That's what I call the Algorithm of Jewish Blood. Where is the utilitarian line drawn? What is an acceptable rate of murder by terrorists? When the terrorists cross the line too much, we know how to act. It happened once--the Park Hotel massacre. The entire people of Israel rose up and demanded decisive action. And received it.
Anyway, David, Hag Sameach.